QGIS MCP Server

Get Unique Values

get_unique_values

Read-only

Return distinct values from a layer field, with an optional limit, to prepare categorized symbology or filters before styling or querying.

Instructions

Return the distinct values of a field. Use 'limit' to cap results (-1 for all). Useful before building categorized symbology or filters.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "layer_id": "<layer_id>",
      "field": "<field>"
    },
    "name": "get_unique_values"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`field`	Yes
`limit`	No
`layer_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds behavioral detail about the 'limit' parameter allowing -1 for all values. While this is useful, it does not disclose potential performance implications or data size limits, so a 4 is appropriate.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, directly stating purpose and usage. No fluff. Front-loaded with the core action. Every word contributes value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description does not need to explain return values. It mentions the practical use case, which is sufficient for this straightforward tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It explains the 'limit' parameter with usage ('Use limit to cap results (-1 for all)'), but does not add meaning for 'field' or 'layer_id', which are somewhat obvious from names. Thus, it partially compensates but could be more thorough.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Return the distinct values of a field.' This is a specific verb ('return') and resource ('distinct values of a field'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_layer_features or get_field_statistics.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides usage context: 'Useful before building categorized symbology or filters.' This implies a clear scenario, but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, earning a 4.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server